About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
CSPAN 12
CSPAN2 9
MSNBCW 8
WHUT (Howard University Television) 4
FBC 3
KQED (PBS) 2
WETA 2
CNBC 1
CNNW 1
KNTV (NBC) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 49
Search Results 0 to 48 of about 49 (some duplicates have been removed)
exchanges, and perhaps get out of this ideowhrojical foreign policy so that we can move to sort of the latin left 3.0, the 1.0 was probably fidel in cuba which i think pretty much went out of, you know, it's been superseded. the second wave is probably hugo chavez. but i think the latin left needs to progress towards a third phase. so perhaps if you combine all of these measures the more innovative social measures and perhaps adherence to more environmental climate change concerns, then the bolivarrian revolution can continue and influence the wider region. >> charlie: many people think that there's little resemblance between chavez and bolivar. >> well, yeah, i think that chavez always made these historical illusions to simon bolivar. i think it was a little bit over the top sometimes. but simon bolivar resonates in venezuela. he united the country. throughout much of the 19th century venezuela was divided politically. you had these regional leaders and the 20th century was dominated by military dictators. venezuela harks back to them and that resonates quite a lot symbolically. that's why
of what i hear and see that reflects on american foreign policy. what do we do about that? >> yeah. okay. >> im away from my country, 65 years. i have just a little question. the first one -- >> make it one. >> i can't make it -- it's just a small one. the united states said 76 billion dollars, what's it up with? they gave them 36 billion last year. attacks our people in gaza. before president obama went to the middle east, sent the message to ben beep, ask him, tell me the dates which you are going to withdraw from the west bank, but he ignore that. when he went there, he said i want to make two states, when you and pal stippians, but he came back again -- >> do you have a question? >> yes, please. the united states, raise real to withdraw, but they ignore that also. how can we punish this state to take our things? thank you. >> uh-huh. >> third question, lady in the back. >> lady in the back, where is she? >> thank you. i'm an iranian-american journalist. >> uh-huh. >> you spoke about different players -- >> uh-huh. >> -- on this issue. what about the role of iran? do you see the role
, foreign policy tends to either stain or illuminate a president's legacy. time will tell which foreign policy position will define the obama years. joining us to discuss from washington is former assistant secretary of state and professor at george washington university, professor pj crowley. professor, thank you for joining us. >> hello. >> pj as we talk about the legacy of the obama doctrine, vis-a-vis our war on terrorists drones. the attacks were motivated to do what they did by the wars in iraq and afghanistan. i'll quote a little bit from that story. the 19-year-old suspect in the boston marathon bombings has told interrogators that the american wars in iraq and afghanistan, motivated he and his brother to carry out the attack. what do you make of that, pj? >> i'm not surprised at all that has been a motivator for jihadists around the world, particularly the u.s. invasion of iraq in 2003. so this just continues a theme, and it's not even unique to the united states. faisal shazad, the times square bomber, said he was motivated by the ongoing drone campaign in pakistan. >> wes, as
as normal and sweet. >>brian: is there a chance they were normal men and did our foreign policy play into this? a foreign c.i.a. operative, head of the osama bin laden unit, what went into the mind set of these two that you can ascertain from what you know? >> i think we're going to find because of the internet age, because of the rapidity of communications, the grievances of the arab world against the united states in terms of our foreign policy, whether it's being on the arab peninsula, supporting the saudi tyranny, supporting the israelis is now a common thread across the muslim world. as long as that foreign policy stays in place, we need to realize that we're cultivating enemies. this is going to continue both at home and abroad for a very long time. >>john: we should expect more of these kinds of attacks? >> without a doubt, sir. this is no reason to believe our domestic population of young male muslims is going to be immune from the propaganda of al qaeda and other groups that has worked everywhere in the world. this is just a problem that america needs to face. we don't neces
that is the essence of that obama foreign policy sir al qaeda or the middle east and a reality on the ground that shows what the general is saying very clearly with the al qaeda of presents whether syria, yemen, north africa, it is growing and strengthening. how do we resolve policy and reality? >> first of all, the first lessons of solving the problem is recognized the we refuse to use the term radical islam they use violent extremist. but added the congressional hearing or any report issued this during government. lou: i have to interrupt we have just learned watertown police law enforcement are now sending of bomb disposal robot into the location of dzhokar tsarnaev who remains immobilized in the boat of the backyard and franklin street. they're sending in the bomb disposal robot and we will keep you apprised but that is the situation. >> and with the remote to robot it would seem they don't fear his condition is in such good condition to interfere with the robot? it seems to me that they think he may be really down but going back to the other issue they said there is no policy we don't e
security and foreign policy issues as opposed to his very robust domestic agenda? jon: lindsey graham was on with his last hour and pretty critical about the job the department of homeland security -- which, after all, is an arm of the administration -- did in the tsarnaev case. want to play a clip. >> my problem with this administration is their policies are failing. they do not believe that we're at war. they ignored signs and warnings from libya. we haven't had one person detained as an enemy combatant for intelligence-gathering purposes since he's been president. jon: is this starting to resonate with voters, do you think? >> i don't know yet that we've seen that. but we could see it over time. i think it pretty much depends on how the public views the president's handling of these incidents, and do they think that the president is keeping them safe. as we saw under president bush, you can have a horrific attack on the home lambed, and if you respond -- homeland, and if you respond in a way the public feels you should respond, they like your response, they're going to feel good ab
foreign policy in our countries, which a lot of americans are very ignorant about. cenk: i saw a tweet before i came on the air of someone saying the iraqis have been living with these kind of i.e.d.'s for 10 years because of the war we started when they didn't attack us on 9/11 at all. it happens here once, we all totally justifiably freak out it could have been us, could have been our kids, only it was the iraqis, it was their kids based on a war we started and never be should have. cenk: security, and how do you protect against these threats think of iraqar kabul any city with a high level of violence, you have the entire government set up to prevent bombs from getting through and they still can't do it. you have 100,000 iraqis and americans searching every car and they still get through. there is no way to protect against this stuff on a 100% basis. the fact that this happens with irregularity with other things blowing up around the world, we should be thankful for it. one in 20 million is not bad. cenk: on a relative scale. there is one mythical thing that if it turns out it was a
overseas. in terms of our foreign policy. if we need to keep doing that and we have to keep doing it. we have to tell the american people how bloody and how long this war is going to be. this has nothing to do with gender equality or elections. it has to do with waging war against people believe to be interfering with their land and their faith. lou: thank you both for being with us. >> thank you, sir. lou: up next, the markets recover after yesterday's massive sell-off. we will show you why here next. ♪ @ ♪ lou: stocks recovered from the biggest 1-day sell-off of this year on encouraging news on housing. joining us now, a senior u.s. economist for deutsche bank securities. this is a pretty impressive performance today. is it convincing enough hat we are going to see more strength on the days ahead? >> it certainly has been impressive as a performance. i think a lot of the movement we saw today was just to recover from the massive sell-off yesterday when the news of the tragedy in boston struck. stocks went into a sharp nosedive. the news that it was a relatively limited event
, in regard to our foreign policy in terms of what we're doing in the muslim world. so their motivation is becoming very similar to the motivation in other parts of the muslim world. >> that's something we really do need to take a closer look at because it really brings the world here. it brings chechnya here to the u.s. by looking at it through social media and the internet. thank you so much for joining us michael scheuer. >> thank you. >>> the time is 25 after the top of the hour. coming up, we'll return to boston where the younger suspect is in the hospital. investigators are waiting to talk with him. >>> plus, the lockdown is over in boston. but our terrorism analyst says that the brothers did not work alone. great first gig! let's go! party! awwwww... arigato! we are outta here! party...... finding you the perfect place, every step of the way. hotels.com because every flake is double-toasted... splashed with sweet honey... and covered in rich double-roasted peanuts. mmm. [ hero ] yummy. [ male announcer ] kellogg's crunchy nut. it's super delicious! [ male announcer ] just when yo
not only a lost opportunity domestically. the foreign policy of this also. the most interesting thing that reagan did early on in foreign policy was the air traffic controller strike and toughness at times at home have repercussions aboeroad. this story got lost because of the boston bombings. >> but helps new awax. you only have to send that message once or twice to have one person go back and go, he is crazy. you know what he just told me? he said he was going to destroy me. >> what the president, what president obama, for reasons not only to him and his nature, clearly does not do or cannot do is something that lyndon johnson did do and this story has been repeated too many times for it not to be apockrifal. frank church a senator from idaho opposed senator johnson on an element of vietnam policy and another senator, i forget which one, wanted a line in an appropriations bill for a dam in his state. and he was on the fence with regard to lyndon johnson's view on vietnam policy. he called the president specifically asking, i need this. kou help me get it? and the president of the un
's investment in foreign-policy is national security insurance. there is nothing foreign about foreign policy anymore. smartcan make the small,. w vestments upfront and avoid more costly conflicts and greater burdens down the road. , we'vepast few months seen developments underscore the state -- stakes for having a strong and -- strong american presence in the world. that was a positive step toward stability in the volatile region of the world where we need partnerships. the committee is more than immersed in suyyruiaia. we have treated millions to humanitarian relief -- we have provided millions to humanitarian relief. i expect we will talk about syria somewhat today. having returned from beijing and north koreathe issue took center stage, we are reminded once again that america is the guardian of global security. we should be proud of that. one not turn our back on keys nor will we hesitate what we need to do to defend our allies. if budget is an analyst patient of our values and priorities -- this budget is an illustration of our values and priorities. i have a record of wanting to do defi
.o. toward national security and foreign policy which is to say to lighten the american footprint in the reasoning, but to deal with these threats of so that's one point. the other thing is, i don't think that barack obama considers the drones a panacea in the war on terror. and one of his top national security advisers said to me, he sees it as an important tactical weapon that has strategic implications. but mostly, he sees it as an opportunity to try to prevent the next attack in the united states. so he was pretty hard nosed about that. so that's where he is. >> richard, you know, i can make moral and legal arguments for codifying our drone program. the rules of engagement and i have in the past. there is also a very practical argument for getting this down on paper. and increasing the transparency on it. when, not if, when bad actors get their hands on the same technology that we have, and use it in terrible ways, we really lose our ability to lean on our allies and world bodies and ask them to sanction or punish these bad actors for an unaccountable drone program when the ma
the implications here in terms of foreign policy and possibly national security and how the white house responds in the coming days. first before we do that, i want to play some sound from dzhokah tsarnaev's uncle who came and spoke to the press earlier this morning, talking about check nia, the checken identity in the united states, let's play a little of that sound. >> hatred to those who were able to settle themselves. these are the only reasons i can imagine of. anything else, anything else to do with religion, with islam, that's a fraud. it's a fake. >> "the new york times" white house correspondent, peter baker is with us. peter, thanks for joining us, you were the moscow bureau chief for four years and covered the second chechen war. a lot of folks in america are hearing the word chechnya for the first time and don't understand the dynamics between chechnya, russia and the united states. can you give us a little primer about the sort of tumult in the region? >> it's a good question. we're learning a lot today, a lot of americans haven't focused on what has been chilling situation for many
. there are people on the other side of the world that don't like our foreign policy, in the middle east who don't like our culture in any way. to them we're the enemy. doesn't it stun you, mr. mayor, people from a breakaway or rebellious former soviet union have come and killed anonymously people they don't even know but know them as fellow inhabitants of america, just as a slaughter? and we don't have a front with chechnya. we don't have a beef with them. or them with us. that just, to me, is like -- i almost feel like i don't know anything to say at this point sometimes. >> it was a total shocker to me. i went through about ten different scenarios yesterday who it could be, from, you know, islamic radicals to right-wing crazies, to just isolated people who were just nuts. i never would have thought of chechnya. the fact is, if anything, we're seen as somewhat sympathetic with the chechnyans and overcritical of the russians. maybe we're right or wrong. that's the way it's seen. i was in russia a day after the attacks in beslan, you know, that really were a tremendous shock to the russian peopl
school massacre. over 300 killed, mostly children. the moscow metro bombing, 39 people killed. foreign policy has an interesting anal a sysianalysis. chernen writes the numerous terror strikes have not been included in the short list of major terrorist attacks, america's 9/11, london's 7-7, and spain. instead, russia was placed in a different category where like in israel, terrorism was deemed a response to the government's repression, rather than an attack against humanity as such. that's obviously one person's take. in the broader conversation about global terror, those attacks are not often included in the same list. >> although if you are living in moscow or living in russia, you would certainly say they were terrorism. the russians did at the time say they were attacks of terrorism. a conversation we're having now is a reminder of why we do need to know what's happening around the world. why it matters what's happening in chechnya, the capital was flattened during the war there. that chows of chechens have been killed and at some point we have to wake up to the fact that the world
rights foreign policy. it is not a foreign policy priorities and because it is the right thing to do. it is tied to our own security. it is tied to the possibility of prosperity and nation's living by rule of law. countries were strong human- rights prevail are countries where people do better. economy strive, rules of law are better. there are countries that lead on the world's station project stability across the regions. strong respect for human rights is not merely an indicator that the country is likely doing unleashes a country's potential. it helps to advance growth and progress. of a countrythink like burma for a minute. because of its steps towards democratic reform, a country that has been isolated for years is now making progress. has it reached for rwanda to be? no. but it is on the road. it is moving. more people are contributing to the economy and participating in the government, leading to faster growth and development. by starting to embrace universal rights the government is opening the doors to a stronger partnership with their neighborhood -- with their neighborhoo
issues in difficult american foreign policy. when do we get involved in an atrocity going on within someone else's country. that's a very tough question. would we have intervened in germany in 1938 if we knew what was going on. i think we all like to say we we d have and if we could, would have stopped it. it presupposes and the implication is we have a right do that anywhere in the world if there's an atrocity going on. that a u reflect on little bit? >> thank you, senator. defined one t significant kpant issue -- of militaryal basis intervention in the country. certainly every nation has a themselves in t their own history of self-defense. but to answer your question, you of the dimensions of his that you laid out, as did amplify on psey who cuts back ations and on the quell, when do we do this. what basis? we canthere a frame work follow? y answer is you start with the realities. these are both imperfect different situations. out, i dempsey laid think, rather clearly some of he dimensions of each of the countries in that region. self-interest. you have others who have self-inter
foreign policy discussions. we're not a country that's in the mood to go invade anyone anymore. the tsarnaev brothers have been in the united states much longer. they were really immigrants and the fact that they come from chechnya, a place that's been at war with russia has in some ways softened the response. so far at least, i think we have not seen as much anti-muslim kind of talk as there was after 9/11. >> i think you're absolutely right. there's been some. there's been some of that almost knee jerk reaction, which obviously is a problem, but nothing like what occurred immediately after 9/11. isn't that right? >> yeah. i also think -- there are a billion muslims in the world. muslims come in every shape and color. in the american imagination, we have almost racialized what it means to be muslim. the fact these guys are from chechn chechnya under mines the level of racist reactions. to some degree part of what the anti-muslim sentiment after 9/11 was not only based on religion, but it was based on the idea of race and ethnicity. >> thanks very much for coming in. >> thank y
pillar of our 21st century foreign policy. there's no disagreement about that in my country. the parliament passed last year anonymously a policy resolution which defined the icelandic objective in the arctic. so together with the other nordic countries we hope to play a constructive part and evidence of this was that few months ago one of our april servant was the first director general of the secretary of the arctic. >> several currency questions. the icelandic money is coming out of financial turmoil. what would you consider the future of the money? and are you considering any alternative currency for iceland ? >> i think it's a positive indication of how we have all dealt with the financial crisis. i can comment on the national press club only six minutes are left and i get that question. [laughter] of the financial issues. nobody would believe that for a five years ago. without in state of affairs we could perhaps come together again and talk about how we're the financial crisis and how we dealt with a crisis in a different way from many other countries. how we did not
with u.s. foreign policy by including them in the program? >> yes, but i am not in favor of waiting standards to do it. been whatndard has you described, which is a 3% rejection rate. some countries go slightly beyond that because there is not the uniform standard applied by embassies throughout the world. some embassies have more liberal policy with regard to applications. instead of outsourcing decision making, would you like to see in touch with regards to diplomatic and security and economic considerations? >> i would have to review that. there are several established criteria and the act with respect to the current standards. the government provides a reciprocal visa waivers. the government issues secure machine readable passports. the government certifies the program to incorporate biometric identification into their passports. the government reports the thefts of blank passports. that they maintained a low immigrant refusal rate. that they maintain less than 2% projection for travel for non- immigrant applicants. those are the standards and the current law. you guys have the
unwavering in her support of president reagan. just the foreign- policy support. famously, they both worked to sort of speak half-truths about the unsustainability of the soviet union, something that coincided with the placing of the soviet union under its own contradiction. some will tell you it was almost like moses parting the red sea. i don't think it was quite that. but clearly, the truth telling was not irrelevant. hope tonor ms. dissidents working behind the eastern bloc. domestically, they had a -- theyusly important were trying something very radical. they wanted a break with the economic policies of the past. the fact that they were not isolated, they could point to someone on the other side of the ocean in charge of this was important. that made quite a difference. you can see in the tributes paid to lady thatcher, people who work closely to president reagan saying it made a difference. he is not on his own. there is an impressive leader in europe who shares his ideas. host: was it vice versa for her in britain? guest: it was. famously, they got along well. but there were differe
. that is also part of what our foreign policy investments try to change. installing the rule of law. tried to help with a justice system and create accountability for these things. >> but we inhave bto mubakea they were stealing it. >> i did not make that decision. i will certainly review any program that we are engaged in now. if you have any information of some and stealing, let me know immediately. is one penny on the dollar. i can go through a long list of things we invest in that provide a return on investment. we have stopped countless plots against our countryhich h the fbi not cooperated for the cia and other entities not been creating some of the programs we and have thher thgs we work with, we never would have done it. americans would have died. they would have been blown up. but for the discovery of the people that came to these kinds of efforts, we made our country safer. so i have to tell you for the penny on the dollar, i will still make the argument anywhere even though occasionally yes, something gets abused. the -- just as it gets abused in some parts of almost every gover
that is shi w fight that is also part of what our foreign policy tries to change with the historic rule of law to help with the justice system to create accountability. >> that we're still spending -- sending money if they were stealing and. >> i did not make that decision and i will certainly review any program we are engaged in now and if you have information of what we do now let me know immediately but one thing. all of this that we do senator paul is 1 penny on the dollar. i go through long list of things that we invest in i will give you an example we have stopped countless plots against our country, which had the fbi not cooperated and the cia and other entities and had not worked with the justice system's and interpol and the other things we work with we never would have done it. americans would have died and blown up and but for the discovery of the christmas bomber which came through these efforts we made our country safer. i have to tell you for the penny on the dollar will still ma t men even know yes something is abused just as it is abused of almost evygoernment. >> win the war b
and we could concentrate solely on traditional foreign policy threats like iran and syria and the instability of the korean peninsula. of course those threats remain large but this shows we are still a country in terrorist cross hairs both from abroad and from within. >> it sounds like you think this will reshape our focus as well. >> i think it will, no question about that. but at the same time we've got to make sure that we don't single out one particular community for attack and os t tracism. >> it's very common for them to sfwring we don't care at all to we exaggerate the threat. this is a common pendulum swing. it's also a mistake. and what we've also seen, just in the last week, is most of the coverage and most of the discussion by elites on both side of the aisle has been far more measured than what you just read by representative king. >> but it was measured because we were still a country in crisis. now that it seems that the crisis, perhaps, has subsided, now the nuts will come out. >> that's true, and this is where the media plays an even bigger role. in the mon
strategic allies like israel and brazil and poland reward for their cooperation with u.s. foreign policy by included in the face or -- visa waiver program? >> yeah, but i'm not in favor of living standards do. i think about to meet the standards and procedures under. spit out another standard has been what you describe, which is a 3% rejection rate as determined by the customs and immigration service. some countries go slightly beyond the cart -- some embassies have a more liberal policy with regard to applications than others do. with that in mind, instead of outsourcing decision-making to the customs and integration service, would you like to see input with regard to diplomatic and security and also economic considerations when these determinations are made? >> i would have to review the. let me just tell you that there are several established criteria in the act with respect to the current standards of the visa waiver. one is that the government provides reciprocal visa waivers. too, that the government issues secured machine readable passports. three, that the government certifies th
overall policy of how is the foreign affairs budget, the state department budget would be prioritize in the entire region as opposed to just focusing on one country since they seem to be working together ever before? >> well, thank you very much, congressman meeks. i am very, very hopeful. i am planning a trip shortly to both colombia and brazil and other countries hopefully as time permits. we've had some issues, obviously, with argentina over some debt issues, repayment, so forth, which we need to work through. but, look, western hemisphere is our back yard. it's critical to us. too often countries in the western hemisphere think that the united states doesn't pay enough attention to them and on occasion it's probably been true. i think we need to reach out vigorously. we plan to. the president will be traveling to mexico very shortly. other -- i can't many countries. he will be going. i will be going, other high-level visits. we'll try to do everything possible to try to change the attitude of a number of nations where we've had obviously sort of a breach in the relationship ove
. and really at the heart of it is the fact that one of obama's enduring legacies when it comes to foreign policy, he has solidified assassination as an essential component of policy. >> they can do it in the shadows, as you pointed out. in the book, i would say there hasn't been a lot of public resistance aside from people like you and others in the press. how have they done this without facing much resistance? publicly or inside the government from people who should be stepping up and saying, wait a minute, we can't kill u.s. citizens without due process? >> right, i think there's no question that if john mccain had won the election in 2008 or mitt romney had won it in 2012 that liberals would be screaming about this stuff and saying, you know, that -- there would be this thing, war crimes, we should do impeachment and the reality is that i think a lot of people -- and i think this is sincere. a lot of people so fed up with the iraq war, perceived as the sort of crimes of the bush administration they wanted it to end and the obama administration has sold people a bill of goods. the idea
foreign policy. and there's no disagreement about that in my country, that parliament passed last year unanimously a policy, a resolution which defined the icelandic objectives in the arctic. so together with the other countries, we hope to play a constructive part, and evidence of this was that a few months ago, one of our april civil servants and officials was chosen as the first director general of the secretary of the arctic council. >> the icelandic is coming out of financial turmoil. what would you consider the future of the krona, and are you at all considering any alternative currency for iceland? >> i think it's a positive indication of how we have moved out of the financial crisis, i can come here to the press club, and only when six minutes are left, i get that question orkt financial issue. nobody would have believed that four or five years ago. but that is the state of affairs that it could perhaps come together again and talk about how we recovered from the financial crisis and how we dealt with the crisis in a different way from many other countries, how we did not follo
families have skin in the game of foreign policy, but if you don't a son or daughter in uniform, husband or wife in uniform, where is your skin in that game when you're not paying for those decisions? and when we make decisions that we don't have to pay for, we make bad decisions. i agree with the president. folks need to pay their fair share. i think we all need to have some skin in the game. folks who make more ought to pay more. folks who make less ought to pay less. but we are all members of the board of directors of the united states of america, mr. speaker. all 320 million of us sit on the board of directors of the united states of america, and yet you ought to have skin in the game when you are making decisions about high this organization runs. how do we create revenue? how do we reduce deficits? how do we make sure folks are paying their fair share? the good news is, mr. speaker, the president's aware of the fair tax. i am not willing to call him a fair tax president. i don't think the president's quite onboard, we are not going to wait on the president to be onboard. we are goi
because of president obama's foreign policy with regard to terrorism. that would also be outrageous. >> there are two sides to this fence. don't politicize an event like this. don't do it. that's opinion, okay. >>steve: stuart varney is going to have a lot to talk about over at fox business today, 9:20 eastern time where he takes control of that channel each and every week. all right, stewart. >>gretchen: coming up, boston has a message for the attacker. we'll show you how citizens are speaking out now. >>brian: a dad passes out behind the wheel, and his young kids spring into action. >> we're going 90. >>brian: the outcome? >>brian: the outcome? nothing short of a miracle. with its foot-activated lift gate. but that's not all you'll see, cause c-max also beats prius v, with better mpg. say hi to the 47 combined mpg c-max hybrid. bjorn earns unlimited rewas for his small business take theseags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjors small busiss earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth why settle for less? ahh, oh!
partner for me in foreign policy but a good friend. >> do you miss her around here? >> i do. she's earned her rest and i know that whatever she does, she's going to be able to continue to be a leader and incredibly positive force for the causes i care about and that she cares about, all around the world. >> the president not able to endorse the vice president. >> who is walking down the hall as you talk to him. >>> let's go to a florida neighborhood that has seen a remarkable turnaround thanks in part to the efforts of one generous man. here's nbc's gabe gutierrez. >> reporter: in the theme park capital of the world, hospitality means big business. >> thank you so much. appreciate it. >> reporter: but to harris rosen, it means much more. >> thank you. >> hospitality really is appreciating a fellow human being. >> reporter: he grew up in the slums of new york, a family of immigrants. now he runs seven hotels in orlando, his self-made success would be remarkable on its own but that's not what he's most proud of. >> came to the realization that i really had to now say thank you. >> reporter:
component of his foreign policy, and obviously, this just emphasizes that. >> [inaudible question] >> the mexicoan government has expressed its interest in that agenda. in that regard, bringing president obama to mexico, what programs can we expect along the road and secretary kerry, -- >> [inaudible] >> some countries in latin american countries were on the back burner for several years. is it your express intent to reach out to the region? >> we have agreed to enlarge our agenda, and we are going to be talking about initiatives that have to do with high level engagement into our economic dialogue. we will be talking and find a mechanism to talk in terms of the vocation, research and innovation. so those issues and structures around them will be on the agenda, and the talks, initially discussed by president obama and president nieto. >> the answer is profoundly, yes, we do intend, i intend to, personally. and, in fact, i had intended to try to travel to the region next week, but because of the events this week, and because of some other things happening, i've had to postpone that
right or wrong, you'll never get in trouble. if you want to be critical of foreign policy because you belief, as a citizen -- remember, we have a thing called the constitution. all men are created equal. everybody, at least from the beginning, white, male, 2 1, with property, could vote. since then we've expanded -- well, i'm not being sarcastic because in terms of the world to have any white male who was sovereign, that we were sovereign. the american revolution declared the people sovereign rather than a king or queen. you couldn't have a king or queen taking your land away because they had finch it to you through sovereign rights. so if every citizen has a right to say what they should or should not do in our government, we would think we could respect that, and yet at the very beginning of the iraq war, when susan sarandon and tim robbins spoke out against the war, they had their invitation to talk to the baseball hall of fame withdrawn. and right after that i had a crew from fox news come to my house to interview me, because i don't go to the studios anymore. they want me? they
in our country and our international security policies must be changed to reflect that, to train foreign terrorists who hate america, are at war with innocent americans and its institutions and that's why i say it's really time for a tougher and stronger new policies in order to protect america in its people. yes, immigration will be a part of our great country, and it also has to be controlled. >> do you think it ultimately has to change the fabric and culture of boston? >> there are some people that want to keep it the way it is. i want to make sure that public safetiet and security of innocent people is protected. that to me is the most fundamental issue and, yes, we'll protect our sacred liberties and freedoms, let's make sure we also protect innocent people from terrorist activities. >> ray flinn served as mayor of boston from 1994 to 1993 and thank you for joining us. >> we'll slip in a quick break. the latest situation on what's happening in boston and watertown. residents under lockdown. there's a shot of them earlier, but something is happening in watertown. we'll let you know i
to him of his reign. his father died in 1944. two years before that, his dad told foreign reporters that his son, kim jung il had been in charge of day-to-day policies for the previous decade. that takes us back to the early 1980's. if you want to get into real inside baseball, north koreaian media was talking about the rise of the party center in the 1970's. party center being eventually debuted as kim jung il. he had about a quarter century of grooming before becoming the king. he had a long time to consolidate authority. with with his hands on the dashbored, he-dived the plane. he was the only -- he more or less destroyed the institutions of party and state. so by the late 1990's and early 2000's there was no correspondence between what the party was supposed to look like and what the cabinet and state system was supposed to look like and the way he was operating the government. he was more or less running the country out of his bathtub with a couple of police secret forces to help. he paid no attention whatsoever to continuing the dynasty. he was completely feckless on this. t
by foreign governments. the cia recognized this in an internal review and acknowledged many of the interrogation techniques were inconsistent with the public policy positions the united states has taken regarding human rights. the united states is understandably subject to criticism when they criticize another nation for engaging in torture and the unjustified same conduct under national security arguments. there are those that defend the techniques of waterboarding, stress positions and sleep deprivation because there was the office of legal counsel which issued a decision of proving of their use because they defined them as not being tortured. those opinions have since been repudiated by legal experts and even if its opinion it relies on a very legal definition of torture but also on factual representations about how the techniques of would be implemented that later proved inaccurate. this is an important context as to how the opinion came about but also as to how policy makers rely upon it. based upon a faeroe view of the available public record we determined that an appl
by foreign governments. the cia recognized this in an internal review and acknowledged that many of the interrogation techniques that employed were inconsistent with the public policy positions that the united states has taken regarding human rights. the united states is understandably subject to criticism when it criticized another nation for engaging in torture, then justifies the same conduct under national security arguments. there are those that defend the techniques of, like waterboarding, stress and sleep deprivation because there was the office of legal counsel, which issued a decision of proving of their use because they defined them as not being torture. those opinions have since been repudiated by legal experts and the olc itself. and even in it his opinion it relies not only on a very narrow legal definition of torture but also on factual representation about how the techniques would be implemented that later proved inaccurate. this is in important context as to how the penny came about but also how policymakers relied upon it. based upon a thorough review of the avai
characterized the treatment as torture when used by foreign governments. the c.i.a. recognized this in an internal review and realized many of the interrogation techniques employed were contrary with the policy the u.s. has taken regarding human rights. the united states is understandably subject to criticism when it criticizes another nation for engaging in torture and then justifies the same conduct under national security arguments. there are those that defend the techniques like waterboarding, stress positions, and sleep deprivation because there was the office of legal council which issued a decision approving of their use because they defined them as not being torture. those decisions have since been repudiated by the o.l.c. it's sefment even in it's peap it relies not only on a narrow definition of torture but also on factual representation about how the techniques would be implemented that later proved inaccurate. this is important context as to how the opinion came about, but also as to how policymakers relied upon it. based upon a thorough review of the available reco
to be critical of foreign policy because you believe as a citizen we have a thing called the constitution. all men are created equal. everyone from the beginning white, male. since then we've expanded. i'm not being sarcastic because in terms of the world to have any white male who is sovereign, the american people declared it rather than a king or queen. you couldn't of a king or queen taking your land away because they had given it to use your sovereign rights of everyone has a right to say what they should or should not do in our government we should expect that and yet at the beginning of the iraq war map when they spoke out against the war they had their invitation to talk to the baseball hall of fame and right after that i had a crew from fox news come to my house to interview me because i don't come to the studio anymore. if they want me they can come to my house. the first question the reporter susan sarandon onu think tim traders'. i turned to her and i said when did i stop beating my life. we want to let you know how this plays out we went on the air and i tried to explain how every
Search Results 0 to 48 of about 49 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)